Your families little piece of the planet is NOT representative of the entire planet. You have a localized climate only. Some areas are obviously going to get hotter and some colder. Patterns will shift. How do you know that your climate is the same now but due to different factors?

Post your data or is it just passed on verbally (rhetoric and relative)?

Skepticism is one thing but denial disguised as skepticism is another. You seem to be projecting what your community has experienced with that of the rest of the world.

My experince has been extremely different than yours. I grew up on the coast of Newfoundland. Pack ice that arrived every year at the same time has not appeared since the mid 1990's and my hometown that was once blanketed in snow yearly now has only frozen water puddles throughout the winter.

I was going to enquire whether that was the original NASA figures or the corrected ones, but the perceptive and lightening quick "Anon" beat me to it.

So instead, I shall ask if the USA stats which must form a huge part of the global figures were produced by the sort of, er, quaint temperature stations that Anthony Watts illustrates so regularly on his site? You know the ones, they started on green field sites and ended up surrounded by car-parks, air-conditioning units, glass office blocks and, heavens to Betsy (is that authentic North American?) they indicated rising temperatures over the last few decades - I can't imaging why!

wayne, at what time of day did they record the temperature? Same time every day? And when you say the 1930s had higher temperatures are you talking about one time record highs for a day or a week or a month or a year, higher averages over the whole year, monthly averages, weekly averages, daily averages or what? We need more information to decide what exact value to put on your family's data.

And about the 1930s having high temperatures... do you not realise that in the Canadian prairies and the US plains during the 1930s we had a major drought for years, with dust blizzards, plagues of grasshoppers, crop failures, etc.? In other words a warming climate which may have been responsible for a climate catastrophe. Now that the temperature is higher than in the 1930s, should we not expect a worse climate catastrophe? A drought which is worse and which will last for decades or centuries?

And when you say the 1930s had higher temperatures are you talking about one time record highs for a day or a week or a month or a year, higher averages over the whole year, monthly averages, weekly averages, daily averages or what?

They kept tack of all of the above, I took over from my mother in 1981 and stopped in 1991 when an automated weather station was installed.

My family were the local offical weather observers, with government equipment.

We need more information to decide what exact value to put on your family's data.

Enviroment Canada has all my data, but they only go back to 1914, for my area, we started in 1898.

Watts classified all those surface stations as good bad or indifferent, and the lads at Climate Audit ran the numbers again with various subsets of the stations included and excluded. Guess what? The results all came out the same; they vindicated Hansen. I've written about this before, and you've read it here before, I'm sure. Why the silly games?

"According to Norwegian Aftenbladet, IPCC Chairman Pachauri had done his usual alarmist presentation in a good mood. He even included a joke about 20-30 percent of species dying out as a cause of global warming, and this extinction would include climate skeptics.

Åm had done his homework and disproved the outrageous statements, and concluded by accusing the IPCC of committing scientific fraud. One of his strongest points was the scientific critique of the hockey graph that the climate alarmists love so much.

Personally, I have read so many science reports discrediting that graph that it is hard to believe that IPCC is still using it with a straight face, but that is just my meager science reporter’s opinion…

After the debate, Aftenbladet asked Åm what his scientific credentials on climate science was, and Åm answered “I have the same credentials as Al Gore”.

They don't have Calgary data for the 1930s. At Gleichen on Jan 9, 1936, the max temp was -3.3 degrees and the min temp was -15.0. Here in Calgary the current temp is -1.1 degrees. So it's warmer here than in Gleichen in 1936. Single day temperatures don't mean that much, you need to look at trends over a long period, which is what the scientists are doing. There are various factors involved; Calgary may be hotter because of urban heat effect, but it may be cooler here than usual because of La Nina which may be causing much of the crappy weather on the west coast.

It might be a good idea to compare the low temperatures, as well. Is it warmer at night now than it was in the 1930s?

I went through every month for everyday and compared highs and lows. For 1936 and 2007. Sometimes it was hotter on one day than 1936 but over the whole year, month by month, day by day, 1936 was hotter, where I live.

The data was collected in the exact same spot in a rural area since 1898. A Stevenson screen was used to house the thermometers.

This is a public service announcement to BCL readers as BCL might be a little slow in reporting the latest poll numbers from Decima issued today for the period of Jan. 3- Jan. 6. (See thread below for more commentary.)

I was found all the data from my books on their website, going back to 1914.

This makes no sense whatsoever, and seems to contradict what you asserted earlier. Your credibility with me remains very suspect, Wayne.

In any case, as has been said before, temperature measurements in a limited area don't really say anything, and you should probably stop making such an issue of it. If it proves, to you, that AGW isn't real, then fine. You don't need to say that more than once.

Lenny, the equipment came from Environment Canada and what ever it was before that. My Great Grandfather, Grandfather, Mother and my self took several readings a day to come up with the data.

Look up Stevenson screen on wiki and you will get an idea what it looks like.

ti-guy "This makes no sense whatsoever, and seems to contradict what you asserted earlier. Your credibility with me remains very suspect, Wayne."

The data in my books go back to 1898, the records at Enviroment Canada only go back to 1914.

My books record F until 1978 then they switch to C.

My data does not show a hockey stick.

Healthy skepticism is not a bad thing.

ti-guy I farm 2300 acres of land, when Manitoba comes out with their carbon credit plan, I'm going to reap thousands of dollars. If I was the asshole you think I am, what do you think I would be saying.

Taking Enviro Can's annual mean temps for that station gives you an average annual mean of 2.1c for the period of 1930 to 1939. For the period of 2000 through 2006 that number is 2.6c.Your claim is bogus, Wayne.

Jay, years ago I was struck by the fears that middle-class kids without religion had about nuclear war. It was almost an obsession with a few of them. It's almost as though people without religion, who don't belong to any of the great religious traditions, have got to be frightened of something.

Perhaps they're looking for a cause that is almost a substitute for religion. I often point out that some of those who are now warning us against global warming were warning us back in the 1970s about an imminent new ice age, because according to some criteria an ice age is a bit overdue. Remember the fuss about the millennium bug and our computer systems in the lead-up to the year 2000.

Dion will ruin our economy if he ever gets elected. He's an enviro-freak and we can't afford extremists like him in power.

It is also fact that increasing temperatures have been detected on Mars where human activity can hardly be blamed.

Do any of you enviro-freaks wish to explain that annoying little fact that doesn't fit into your loony theory. (And if you're going to rely on the presence of lots of little green men on our neighbouring planet, please back it up with evidence other than National Enquirer articles.)

Ti-guy, I used to give you some credit for a little bit of skepticism, but you've fallen hook, line and sinker for this crapolla.

EnviroCan lists 4 weather stations in Brandon, only one of which(Brandon CDA) has records from the 1930s(and earlier) to the present. I've already posted the numbers for that station above, and they show clearly that the 30's were colder in Brandon, despite your repeated claims to the contrary. In fact, the numbers look pretty much identical to this:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f4/Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png